2) Is stated goal in the Quran to supplant all other religions, by force if neccessary?

3) Is the notion that, to the Islamists, the unbelievers are all infidels, correct?

4) Is it, in fact, that Islam has a goal for the world complete control with everyone being either Islamic or dead?

5) Can you quote any of the Quran's suras which state that Islam proclaims tolerance and peace and love for all people?

6) Is it true that 90-95% of all the armed conflicts around the world today involve Muslims fighting non-Muslims or Muslims fighting each other?

7) Is it true that the world "Islam" is Arabic for "surrender" or "submission" to the will of Allah [God], and not, in fact, derived from the word "peace"?

For Muslims, there exist two kinds of non-Muslim enemies: 'kafir' (non-believers in Islam) and 'ahl al-kitab' (People of the Book). Kafir, such as Buddhists and Hindus, must either convert to Islam or face execution. People of the Book include Jews and Christians. These people need only submit to Muslim authority to avoid forced conversion or death. Although they may keep their original faith, their status becomes 'dhimmi' (a "protected," yet inferior non-Muslim status). So instead of outright forced conversion or slaughter, the Christians and Jews would be allowed to remain somewhat unmolested as long as they acknowledged the superiority of the Muslim. But the truth of the matter is that such "protection after acknowlement" is rarely guaranteed. Christians and Jews are more likely targets of execution that being "protected", even after becomming 'dhimmi'.

Islam remains a religion of the Dark Ages. It is the most violent and intolerant faith that has ever been presented to mankind. An example of the their belief found within the Quran is the warlike notion of "Jihad," or "Holy War." Apologists for Islam say "Jihad" is one personal struggle to obtain a higher moral standard. But what it really represents is a violent military action (even terrorism) against any non-Muslim. There is practically no other religion today that expouses "Holy War" against a non-believer.

Until a nation has embraced Islam, it is legally considered a battlefield (Dar-ul-Harb). Once it has converted to Islam (or all its citizens have been slaughtered or driven out), it then becomes a Land of Peace (Dar-us-Salaam). Please don't blindly believe this - study the Quran yourself and see what you find. This is really non-debatable - it's written fact.

- Is it true that Algeria is wracked by bitter fighting between Islamic Fundamentalists and the military? The death toll is 100,000 over a ten year period.- Is it true that Nigeria is in the midst of a war in which Muslims are murdering Christians and burning down their churches?- Is it true that a civil war rages in the Sudan between Muslims in the north against the Christians in the south? Is it true that Sudan's militant Muslim regime is slaughtering Christians who refuse to convert to Islam?- Is it true that Pakistani Muslim soldiers raped a quarter of a million Bangali women in 1971 after they massacred 3 million unarmed civilians? Is it true that this atrocity is not considered a sin in Islam, because the religious leader of the soldiers decreed that Bangladeshis were infidels?- Is it true that Islamic activity is not confined only to the "Third World"? Is it true that by 2020 Muslims will account for 10% of the overall population of Europe?- Is it true that Muslims in Britain have made it clear that they have no intention of assimilating? Did Dr. Zaki Badwari, former Director of the Islamic Cultural Centre of London write, "A proselytizing religion [like Islam] cannot stand still. Islam endeavors to expand in Britain. It aims at bringing its message to all corners of the earth. It hopes that one day the whole of humanity will be one Muslim community, the Umma,"?- Is it true that every single Muslim country on this planet is governed by brutal dictatorships (Iraq might be the first to break this pattern)?- Is it true that no other religion teaches their young to strap explosives to their chest and become a suicide bomber?

A comparison:- Muslims are full of grievance, while Americans are full of guilt.- Islam asserts a right to impose its dogma, while the West preaches equality. - Islam is assertive, the West apologetic.

Is it true that regarding infidels (unbelievers), they are the Muslim's "inveterate enemies" (Sura 4:101). Does the Quran say Muslims are to "arrest them, besiege them and lie in ambush everywhere" (Sura 9:5) for them? Is it true that they are to "seize them and put them to death wherever you find them, kill them wherever you find them, seek out the enemies of Islam relentlessly" (Sura 4:90)? Does the Quran say, "Fight them until Islam reigns supreme" (Sura 2:193), and "Cut off their heads, and cut off the tips of their fingers" (Sura 8:12)?

Does the Quran say if a Muslim does not go to war, Allah will kill him (Sura 9:39)? He is to be told, "the heat of war is fierce, but more fierce is the heat of Hell-fire" (Sura 9:81).

Is it true that Muslims are commanded to make war on the infidels (unbelievers) who live around them (Sura 9:123)? Is there such a command in Buddhism?

Is it true that a Muslim should "enjoy the good things" he has gained by fighting (Sura 8:69). Spoils of war are to be trophies? Did Christ mention anything about enjoying the spoils of war?

Is it true that a Muslim can kill any person he wishes if it be a "just cause" (Sura 6:152)? What do atheists say about killing?

Is it true that anyone who fights against Allah or renounces Islam in favor of another religion shall be "put to death or crucified or have their hands and feet cut off alternative sides" (Sura 5:34)? What do Hindus say about killing non-believers?

Does the Quran say that you should slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush? (Quran 9:5). Did Budda say anything about lying in ambush against non-believers?

Does the Quran say, "The smallest reward for the people of Paradise is an abode where there are 80,000 servants and 72 wives, over which stands a dome decorated with pearls, aquamarine, and ruby, as wide as the distance from Al-Jabiyyah [a Damascus suburb] to Sana'a,'"? Do other faiths have, in their vision of Paradise, a collection of servant waiting for you? Do other faiths describe the servantude of others as a good thing?

Does the Quran say that once Islam's followers got to heaven, they could pleasure themselves with endless sexual encounters with 'Houris' (beautiful young virgins) - 72 virgins girls and 28 young pre-pubescent boys? Does Mohammed go one step further and expand the promise of virgins to include a free sex market where there is no limit of the number of sexual partners? Are women and young boys on display as if in a fruit market where you can choose the desired ripeness? Is this truely Paradise, or simply Mohammed's fantasy? Quran 78:31, 37:40-48, 44:51-55, 52:17-20, 55:56-58, 55:70-77, 56:7-40. Read it for yourself.

Does the Quran say that there are even young boys for your pleasure in Islam's Paradise: Quran 52:24, 56:17, 76.19.

It is amazingly curious that in Islam, and no other faith, Paradise is filled with earthly pleasures, They are "houris" (beautiful virgins) and pre-pubescent boys (mentioned above), and:

Could it be that Mohammed's promise of an Islamic Paradise that glittered with the fulfillment of all sorts of worldly desires was nothing but a ploy to recruit those who had no hope or expectation of ever getting these things in their "real" lives? Knowing that they are assured of such a Paradise simply because they follow Islam, Muslims could go around committing plunder, rape, looting, and murder. No other faith condones murder, and no other faith rewards their followers with endless sex with virgin girls and young boys. But don't take my word for it - do like I'm doing and study the Quran yourself.

Brother Maisky, I've provided a wealth of information here. What of what I've written do you dispute? Tell me, and all of CelticRadio, what errors I've made in this post. If I've drawn incorrect conclusions then please correct me. This is not a hate post, as you described, but rather solid facts and references that you can check out yourself. It is wrong to have a prejudicial opinion of something and attack it out of ignorance. On the other hand it is equally ignorant to defend something in the face of overwhemling evidence of its destructive nature out of some false sense of moral equivalency.

Yes, I do believe that what we're witnessing today, the spread of Islamism and violent jihad, is World War 3 (WW 4 if you count the Cold War as WW3). I see this as no different from Nazism in the 1930's or Communism in the 1950's. You either embrace it with open arms (while standing on your knees), or you fight against it. Mine is an attack on an idealogy no different than I do against Socialism or Liberalism, not an attack on a gender or race.

A 14 year old boy is sentenced to 85 lashes for breaking his Ramadan fast.

A 14 year old boy died on Thursday, November 11th, after having received 85 lashes; according to the ruling of the Mullah judge of the public circuit court in the town of Sanandadj he was guilty of breaking his fast during the month of Ramadan.

For more on the appalling state of injustice in Iran, see HUMAN RIGHTS IN IRAN.Ironically, by making it possible for a theocracy to be elected in Iraq if truly free elections are held, GWB has actually increased the odds of this type of injustice taking place in Iraq. As horrible as Saddam Hussein was and is, our true enemies in the Middle East are countries like Iran, and Saudi Arabia, where injustices committed by the theocrats are common. For an example from Saudi Arabia, see Saudi Arabia (1977) Ritual execution by decapitation. These are the people we are actually helping by getting rid of the sadistic, but secular Saddam Hussein regime, who commited the same brutal types of executions as the Saudis for political reasons.Unless we are ready to use neutron bombs to totally de-populate the area, our best bet is to leave them to brutalize each other, and advise anyone with any pretense of civility to stay away.As the Israelis have shown many times, the Arab Muslims simply lack the capacity to be a real threat outside their own borders, and that sealing them off seems to be the only way, outside total genocide, to minimize their terrorist capabilities.

If the world leaves them alone, as we're doing with the Sudan and Saudi Arabia, then the "world" screams for "justice".

If we go in and clean house, then the "world" screams about our "injustice" to "innocent" people.

Osama, an Arab Muslim, did have the capacity to be a real threat outside his own borders. As do those that had a suitcase of Sarin gas in the trunk of their car (as was found this week in Fallujah). Who needs a division of armored vehicles and several wings of state-of-the-art fighters to be a credible threat anymore? Muslim fanatics have been able to do quite a bit of damage throughout the world for the last 30 years with practically no advanced technology or military might. Nobody even mentions Indonesia yet they have had recent bombings that targetted and killed innocents.

What is it about Islam that enjoys killing innocent civilians, and how it is so different from Hitler's "solution"? And there were many during Hitler's time that recommended just leaving him alone as well.

Islam as a faith, and not just that of the Arabic Muslims, is still living in the year 1200.

Sura 9.3 And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans. If then, ye repent, it were best for you; but if ye turn away, know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah. And proclaim a grievous penalty to those who reject Faith.

Sura 9.5 But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

Has Jesus or Budda ever commanded that their followers slay, seize, beleaguer, and ambush the non-believers? Can anyone name a faith that commands such?

Co-existence?

Sura 5.51: O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.

Now that the actual date for elections in Iraq has been set, look for more violence. There are a lot of people in very powerful positions in the Middle East who do not under any circumstances want to see the people of Iraq chose their own leaders. The Mullahs of Iran come to mind, as does the Saudi Royal Family and the leaders of Syria. Freedom has this nasty little habit of being contagious.

Can you imagine how the Iranian religious leaders would react to their own Iranian subjects watching in awe as the citizens of Iraq decide who will govern them?

So, ir you're a Mullah of Iran or a member of the Saudi royal family, how do you prevent this from happening? Violence. Send in the Islamic goon squad. Kill innocent people. Threaten voters. Create enough havoc and maybe you can prevent the elections from even taking place. The US media will be all too happy in presenting your reign of death to all the world.

The real sad thing here is that there are huge numbers of Americans who are rooting for the 'insurgents'. They don't want to see those elections take place either. Heck, there may be people here at CelticRadio that do not want to see those elections take place. Elections in Iraq, and a freely elected Iraqi government, would be a huge victory for liberalism's most hated man: George W. Bush.

If you haven't considered this before, now may be the time. Many liberals and Democrats in this country would rather see the people of Iraq live under a despotic, totalitarian regime than to see Bush prevail in his goal to bring democratic processes to the Middle East.

An attempt of peace in the Middle East has, in the past, garnered the 'author' with a Nobel Prize. Can you see the Liberal's angst in watching Bush receive a Nobel Prize? Don't worry about it, though - only Arafat, the guy that directed the killing of innocent children, could win the Nobel. Bush only destroyed a tyrany and ushered in free elections for the first time in history.

These elections will not come free, though. Hundreds, maybe thousands, of innocent Iraqis will die at the hands of their own 'brothers'. Islam has no place for freedom - only subjugation.

Harvard security expert Graham Allison, founding dean of Harvard's John F. Kennedy School of Government, has written a new book titled "Nuclear Terrorism." Allison says that the chance of terrorists detonating a 10 kiloton nuclear devise in the United States in the next 10 years is 50/50.

He makes two provocative, compelling conclusions. First, if policy makers in Washington keep doing what they are currently doing about the threat, a nuclear terrorist attack on America is likely to occur in the next decade. And if one lengthens the time frame, a nuclear strike is inevitable. Second, the surprising and largely unrecognized good news is that nuclear terrorism is, in fact, preventable.

The United States once relied on the threat of mutually assured destruction to deter the Soviet Union from launching a nuclear strike. But the Islamic terrorists have no fear of dying themselves, so the concept of mutually assured destruction means nothing to them, and thus this threat by the US holds no strength.

- Every day 30,000 trucks, 6,500 rail cars, and 140 ships deliver more than 50,000 cargo containers into the United States, but only 5 percent ever get screened. But even this screening, which rarely involves physical inspection, may not detect nuclear weapons or fissile material.

- There are approximately 130 nuclear research reactors in 40 countries. Two dozen of these have enough highly enriched uranium for one or more nuclear bombs.

- If terrorists bought or stole a complete weapon, they could set it off immediately. If instead they bought fissile material, they could build a crude but working nuclear bomb within a year.

- Pakistan's black marketers, led by the country's leading nuclear scientist, A. Q. Khan, have sold comprehensive "nuclear starter kits" that included advanced centrifuge components, blueprints for nuclear warheads, uranium samples in quantities sufficient to make a small bomb, and even provided personal consulting services to assist nuclear development.

Prior to September 11, 2001, many experts argued that terrorists were unlikely to kill large numbers of people, because they sought not to maximize victims but to win publicity and sympathy for their causes. After the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, however, few would disagree with President Bush's warning that if al Qaeda gets nuclear weapons, it will use them against the United States "in a heartbeat." Indeed, Osama bin Laden's press spokesman, Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, has announced that the group aspires "to kill 4 million Americans, including 1 million children," in response to casualties supposedly inflicted on Muslims by the United States and Israel.

So, do we sit back and wait? Do we dare act proactively? Do we send our troops into harm's way? The "day after" was tough after 9-11. The "day after" a nuke strike is going to be a worse day.

I've run out of blood pressure medicine. The notes below are a steamed rant. You have been warned.

/rant:ON

"In reality Islam is a revolutionary ideology and programme which seeks to alter the social order of the whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals. 'Muslim' is the title of that International Revolutionary Party organized by Islam to carry into effect its revolutionary programme. And 'Jihad' refers to that revolutionary struggle and utmost exertion which the Islamic Party brings into play to acheive this objective. Islam wishes to destroy all States and Governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and programme of Islam regardless of the country or the Nation which rules it. The purpose of Islam is to set up a State on the basis of its own ideology and programme, regardless of which Nation assumes the role of the standard bearer of Islam or the rule of which nation is undermined in the process of the establishment of an ideological Islamic State." - Sayeed Abdul A'la Maududi, Jihad in Islam

"Allah revealed Islam in order that humanity could be governed according to it. Unbelief is darkness and disorder. So the unbelievers, if they are not suppressed, create disorder. That is why the Muslims are responsible for the implementation of Allah's Law on the planet, that humanity may be governed by it, as opposed to corrupt man-made laws. The Muslims must make all efforts to establish the religion of Allah on the earth." - Muhammad 'Abdus Salam Faraj, Jihad: The Absent Obligation

"Whoever says that Islam is free from terrorism or wants to differentiate between Islam and terrorism is committing Al Juhoud and that is Kufr Akbar ? and will take them out of the fold of Islam. The one who says ?we should fight against terrorism?, he is fighting against Islam. We know very well that USA meant no one else by the term ?terrorists? but Islam and Muslims and the one who wants to avoid terrorism is avoiding Islam." - Al Muhajiroun (Bakir School of Thought)

The more I watch, the more I hear, the more I truly am losing my tolerance of this so-called religion of peace. In order to more fully understand them, I am now reading the Quran and see that Islam is a religion of peace only if you are Islamic.

It is the intent of Islam to supplant all religions: that is the stated goal in the Quran. The moderates wish to take a slow but steady course, insinuating themselves into countries (France's population, for instance, is 10% Muslim) and working within the structure of those countries to undermine it to their ends. The fundamentals simply want aggressive jihad right now - there is no delay for them.

More and more, I am giving credence to the notion that to the Islamists, we are all infidels. The Quran is quite explicit in the treatment of infidels if you care to read it for yourselves.

If this continues, and I see no indication that it shall not, I am concerned that we will see a confrontation like we saw from 700 to 1400 AD - a period of Islam's spread from the Arabian penninsula and into Europe. That expansion brought war when the west took a stand against Islam, and many of the same factors are present today. Given the proper circumstances, we could be faced with a holy war in the 21st century.

It is wrong to have a prejudicial opinion of something and attack it out of ignorance. On the other hand it is equally ignorant to defend something in the face of overwhemling evidence of its destructive nature out of some false sense of proprietrty of moral equvolency.

Islam has a goal for the world and that is complete control with everyone being Islamic or dead. I have no qualms with how people wish to worship or not worship, as long as it's not forced on people. Islam is trying to push their cult of death on the world through murder and subjugation. One Christian can kill an abortion doctor and the liberals scream out against all Christians. Islamic fundamentals kill thousands over the course of 30 years and the same liberals fall over themselves with apologies.

On 9/10/01, I was starting to have ideas and thoughts that maybe Israel needs to back off, and leave those Palestinians alone. That changed on 9/11/01. I realized what monsters that fundamentalist Islam breeds. Did you see all the happy faces shouting with glee the fact that 3000 innocent Americans were butchered by "their brothers"?

Barely had the dust cleared from the Twin Towers' collapse before our politicians were on TV telling us Islam is not to blame, don't blame Islam, this has nothing to do with Islam, the terrorists are not true Muslims, etc. But Holland loses one person, just one, to Islamic terrorists and they're ready to boot every Muslim out of the country. They're burning mosques. They're looking into shutting their borders down. What's wrong with this picture? Why does one country get it after one death while we've lost thousands and we still refuse to listen?

The very few Arab-Muslim representatives that have appeared in the media were defensive and equivocating. They seemed more concerned with making sure that the United States prove who was responsible before taking action. They seemed more concerned with protecting their fellow Muslims from violence directed towards them in the United States and abroad than they did with supporting our country and denouncing "leaders" like Khadafi, Hussein, Farrakhan, and Arafat. If the true teachings of Islam proclaim tolerance and peace and love for all people then I want chapter and verse from the Koran and statements from popular Muslim leaders to back it up. What good is it if the teachings in the Koran are good and pure and true when your "leaders" are teaching fanatical interpretations, terrorism, and intolerance.

If the calls for "Jihad!" widen, I fear we non-Islamists will be left with no recourse but to respond with "Crusade!"

/rant:OFF

The Grand Wizard approves this message.

--------------------

"If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe." Carl Sagan

Appeasement can be defined as "giving a bully what he wants". Hitler reoccupied the Rhineland against the Treaty of Versailles, with relatively little opposition from Europe. Hitler deployed troops and formed close alliances, again against the Treaty of Versailles, and again there was little opposition from Europe. The League of Nations was supposed to mediate in cases of territorial dispute and to act as arbitrator between two nations struggling to maintain reasonable diplomatic relations. Hitler and Mussolini were encouraged by the inability of the League to prevent them taking action, however. They looked to the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1933 and noted the League's failure to prevent Japanese expansion. In 1936 Mussolini ordered Italian troops to invade Abyssinia (Ethiopia). The League of Nations took 2 months to decide upon a response, which then lacked 'teeth', much like the UN's "strong oppositions".

In 1938 German troops annexed Austria, and Hitler then aimed at the Sudentenland. Both France and Britain pursued a policy of appeasement. Churchill, most famously, opposed the policy from the start and argued that decisive action had to be taken to prevent the onset of European conflict.

Hitler viewed appeasement as a weakness. Britain and France were extremely unlikely, in his mind, to do anything to prevent his expansion into the East, at least not until it was too late to do anything about it. The Sudentenland was ceded to Germany, and Hitler then invaded the remainder of Czechoslovakia. World War II was then inevitable.

Churchill's greatness lay partly in the fact that he was able to cut through all the "complexities" and get to the root of the matter: that there would be no peace in Europe unless the Nazis were stopped. Bush, likewise, has come to the understanding that there will be no peace in the world unless Islamic terrorists are stopped.

The UN has no power, and even if it did it has a long history of being unable or unwilling to use it against dictators. Appeasement is a hallmark of the UN.

The worldwide anti-war movement, made up of liberals and Socialists, decry war as inhumane. I rather think Saddam's mass graves and torture rooms were inhumane. I rather think the 20 or so blood-stained rooms the US Marines found in Fallujah were inhumane.

There are 164 verses of the Koran that describe jihad, and those references do not imply some sort of "internal" conflict, but rather armed, and to the death, conflict with all who are not Islamic. There is nothing in the Koran that either promotes, condones, nor even allows co-existence with other faiths. It makes no difference whether you're an athiest or a Baptist - to a fundamental Islamist you have to either convert to Islam or die. That, whether you like it or not, is what is written in the Koran, and practiced by the "faithful".

Beheadings of innocent people. Shooting, at point-blank range, the back of the head of a CARE worker. An unidentified woman that now no longer has arms, or legs, or a throat, or guts. Training children to walk around town with explosives wrapped around them. Flying airplanes into civilian buildings. Holding the white flag of surrender while firing a weapon. No religion, no military force, no government has ever espoused such behavior, except Islam.

And when does the Islamic community publically disavow such behavior? I guess they don't have to when so many Americans will do all the apoligizing for them.

The creation of Eurabia is going to be interesting to watch. I just hope the appeasers are learning Arabic.

No, I will not stand to defend them. They want me, and my family, dead. If that makes me a Klansman, then so be it.

When the US military entered Fallujah there were screams by Muslims, the mainstream press, and the anti-war groupies against attacking the holy mosques. How dare the evil US troops shoot bullets into a House of God!

Car bombings and remote-controlled roadside blasts have become routine in the Iraqi capital in recent weeks, including a blast Sunday that wounded two U.S. soldiers.

National Guard forces raided the Sunni Muslim Al-Yassen Mosque in the southern Baghdad area of Abu Dshir on Saturday, said Gen. Saleh Sarhan of the Defense Ministry. In addition to seven cars pre-rigged with explosives, the guardsmen found 30 rocket-propelled grenades, high-powered rifles, mortars and remote control detonators, Sarhan said.

"The National Guard arrested the imam (religious leader) of the mosque," Sarhan said, and detained an additional 18 people suspected of involvement in the car bombings.

Anti-U.S. insurgents used some 60 mosques in the city of Fallujah, west of Baghdad, to stockpile weapons and provide cover during a U.S.-led offensive against the city earlier this month, the U.S. military says. One of the mosques was described as a general arms depot capable of equipping insurgents across much of Iraq.

---

Islam: the religion of "peace"

Oh, by the way, ANOTHER chemical weapons facility was discovered by US Marines in Falljuah on November 23. They were building cyanogen chloride and hydrogen cyanide explosives - both very deadly. Also found were fertilizer-bomb-type agriculturical chemicals; "cook books" containing formulas for anthrax, chemical blood agents, and explosives; a jihad flag; beakers and retorts; and blasting caps. Michael Moore's freedom fighters, huh? The liberals will probably demand OSHA inspections of the insurgent's labs to make sure that the terrorist's labs are safe.

Below is a link to a monograph published by the Army War College in October of this year. Entitled; Islamic Rulings on Warfare by: Dr. Sherifa D. Zuhur, LTCDR Youssef H Aboul-Enein, it might be interesting reading, ot at least a starting point to help understand some of those particular Muslim teachings such as Wahabism. Here is an excerpt from the conclusion of the thirty some page pdf document (which contains several more pages of notes and glossary):

QUOTE

In a 1938 speech urging greater U.S. involvement against theNazis, Winston Churchill pleaded: ?We must arm. Britain must arm.America must arm . . . but arms . . . are not sufﬁ cient by themselves.We must add to them the power of ideas.?60 With this in mind, U.S.policymakers should:1. Become more cognizant of the complexity of Islamic law and thedebates among Muslims. This does not mean that policymakers shoulddirect the process or outcome of these debates.2. Be aware of the danger of simplistic characterizations of Islam asa ?violent religion.? Such characterizations inﬂ ame the emotions ofMuslims everywhere, heighten perceptions of Western hostility,and limit our own ability to understand the future of the war onterrorism.3. Understand how jihadist groups manipulate, hide and deemphasizeaspects of Islamic history, law, and Quranic verses. Jihadists and themadrasas and study groups they sponsor are not creating theologianswho will contribute to the spiritual growth of Islam but suicidebombers and foot-soldiers involved in Islamic nihilism.4. Recognize that what al-Qaeda and its franchises fear most are Islamiclaws, histories, and principles that do not conform to their militant ideologies.Therefore, the struggle between liberal and radical interpretations ofIslam is a key aspect of the global war on terror.5. Acknowledge that a perfectly deﬁ ned delineation between?mainstream? and extremist views is not evident. Al-Qaeda and otherjihadists proselytize with interpretations such as those of Muhammadibn Abd al-Wahhab, Ibn Taymiyya, and Sayyid Qutb. But Wahhabismis at the core of today?s Saudi Arabia, and Saudis must decide howto best counter interpretations that lead toward extremism. IbnTaymiyya?s and Sayyid Qutb?s notions of social justice, the necessaryIslamic character of leadership, and the importance of the Quran arehighly palatable ideas to most Muslims, in contrast with other keyjihadistnotions in these theorists? work. That mixture of palatable and offensive ideas compounds the difﬁ culties of the Egyptiangovernment in seeking to limit radical inﬂ uence. We nonethelessmust understand the implications of the measures our allies chooseto adopt.6. Realize that the majority of Muslims do not speak Arabic. Thismeans that Islamic teachings can be manipulated, as evidencedby the varying English translations of the Quran ranging from themoderate to the radical. To the non-Arabic speaking masses inAfghanistan, Pakistan, or Indonesia, Arabic is a sacred language.Therefore, a radical cleric preaching and lacing his speech withArabic and Quranic words takes on an air of holiness, even thoughthe sentiments he expresses reﬂ ect jihadic opinion.7. U.S. forces, particularly those involved in psychological operations,need to be educated in aspects of Islamic history, law, and culture. AsIslamic militants quote and violently interpret verses from the Quranand hadith, U.S. and allied forces should not plead ignorance, butachieve a higher level of familiarity with religious and other aspectsof Muslim culture. U.S. and allied forces may better comprehend thespeciﬁ c dilemmas of our Muslim allies if they are familiar with themessages of jihadist and moderate Islam. Alternatively, they shouldconsult experts who are well-versed in these matters.8. Recognize the simultaneous impracticality of armistices andreconciliation with Islamist militants, and the Islamic rationale forattempting such solutions. Such efforts were attempted in both SaudiArabia and Iraq, but, in fact, those already passionately committedto the jihadistworldview will not be won over, and only those less committed might waver. We might therefore conclude morepessimistically.9. Factor in the possibility of failure in the battle against jihadistsentiment, while working as assiduously as possible for a different outcome.That Islamism consists of moderate as well as radical, extremistgroups operating in a politically unstable environment mayrather point to a protracted struggle and period of reformulation.Knowledge of Islamic discourses will still be helpful and necessaryin determining our responses to such a situation.

Time for a joint news conference, attended by the worldwide press. We just killed ourselves a few more Jews!

Palestinian militants from Ezz el-Dein Al-Qassam brigades, left, the Hamas military wing, and from Fatah Hawks, right, a militia linked to Fatah movement, talk during a joint news conference in Gaza city, Sunday Dec. 12, 2004. Palestinian militants from the two groups blew up an Israeli army base at the Gaza-Egypt crossing Sunday by sneaking more than a ton of explosives through a tunnel, killing four Israeli soldiers and wounding at least 10 - the largest Palestinian attack in the month since Yasser Arafat's death.

There are other reports that it was a coordinated attack, with terrorists firing on the rescue workers and survivors in the aftermath.

The world media flocks and panders to report the bragging of terrorist murderers, in essence giving them more and more legitimacy. Isn't this fun? Extra credit if you can tell the terrorists from the media. It's important to give them air time, so we could understand them. We need to learn why they hate us, and we need to make them feel heard, to feel their pain. It's not like the Jews are real people, right?

These "freedom fighters" murder and blow things up in order to attract the attention of the media and the praise of Michael Moore. The media puts a nice, they're-not-so-bad spin on them, helping them push their "cause" and win the public's sympathy. Emboldened by all the attention, the terrorists go out and murder again, and the media lionizes them again, and ... and ... and ...

I don't think I can remember the last time that the media actually used the word "terrorist" to describe anybody but members of the Bush administration. Oh well, these religious men are a peace-loving group anyways.

On a fashion note, the black and white checkered facial covering makes a chic and insouciant change from the more traditional but somewhat overdone all-black maquillage. Expect to see the newer trend emerging on runways in Paris and London this spring.

No word yet if the militia has been having difficulty with up-armoring their stolen vehicles.

Certainly there will be a concerted public outcry by (insert your favorite group here) denouncing this action. Not. And therein lies a great deal of truth.